Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #555614 > unrolled thread
| Started by | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-02-22 12:37 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-02-22 21:48 +0000 |
| Articles | 4 on this page of 64 — 12 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 12:37 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-22 15:03 -0600
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-02-22 13:38 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 14:07 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-22 22:35 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 15:03 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-23 00:12 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 16:32 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-23 00:54 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 17:22 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-23 02:21 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 18:48 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-23 03:36 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 20:26 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-23 07:19 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 10:39 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-23 13:05 -0600
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-23 20:12 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-02-22 15:56 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-23 00:13 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 16:17 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-02-22 21:05 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 21:56 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-23 07:21 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 10:46 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-23 20:14 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-23 08:34 -0600
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-23 06:05 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 22:14 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-02-22 22:23 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 22:50 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-23 07:25 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 10:46 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-23 13:06 -0600
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-23 20:15 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 10:19 -0600
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-23 18:01 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 11:03 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-23 20:19 +0000
he gave the limit of a stage of suction pumping of water, at sea level noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 17:02 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2016-02-23 06:16 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 22:52 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 16:34 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 19:46 -0500
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 08:04 -0600
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 10:34 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-23 20:21 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 12:52 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-02-23 15:31 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 15:57 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-24 00:42 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-02-23 16:57 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-24 00:38 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 16:53 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-24 01:15 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 15:09 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-26 23:20 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 15:38 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-26 23:51 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 18:30 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-27 03:50 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 16:04 -0800
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-24 00:53 +0000
Re: Penino's continuing lunace about Schlieren Imaging jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-22 21:48 +0000
Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-27 03:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <e1j7qc-sac.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #557111 |
James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote: > On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 4:01:05 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 3:31:06 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > On Tuesday, February 23, 2016 at 5:16:05 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> It is irrelevant whether or not Toepler used his invention to verify >> >> >> that moist air contains gaseous H2O as thousand of people in the >> >> >> 150 years since his invention have used his invention to do so. >> >> > >> >> > Surreal. >> >> >> >> Delusional. >> >> >> >> I suppose you also believe that after inventing the Peacemaker, Sam Colt >> >> immediately ran out and jumped on his horse to fight indians. >> > >> > Desperation. >> >> Still delusional. >> >> Toepler was interested in fluid flow and shock waves; trivial stuff >> like humidity and convection had already been figured out. > > Idiot. Kook. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-23 16:04 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2e0f8efe-0372-47f3-a233-2bd581b1d22a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #555984 |
On Tuesday, February 23, 2016 at 12:31:07 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > Sure it does, and the index of refraction of liquid water is vastly > different than the index of refraction of both gaseous water and air. > > That is why using Schlieren imaging allows one to tell the difference > between them. You trust the assumptions of the people that are telling you that this imaging detects gaseous H2O. I don't. I am a physicist. You are not. Now do you get it? It's that simple, dude. You trust sheep, I don't.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-24 00:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dgbvpc-v3e.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #556055 |
James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, February 23, 2016 at 12:31:07 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> Sure it does, and the index of refraction of liquid water is vastly >> different than the index of refraction of both gaseous water and air. >> >> That is why using Schlieren imaging allows one to tell the difference >> between them. > > You trust the assumptions of the people that are telling you that this > imaging detects gaseous H2O. I don't. Nope, about 150 years of usage by physicists, chemical engineers, aeronautical engineers, audio engineers and ballistic engineers. > I am a physicist. You are not. No, you are not. I would bet I have far more physics courses completed successfully than you, but that is irrelevant. You are clueless and delusional. > Now do you get it? Yep you are delusional. > It's that simple, dude. You trust sheep, I don't. Burton, R.A., "A Modified Schlieren Apparatus for Large Areas of Field," J. Opt. Soc. Am. 39, 907-907 (1949). Schardin, H., Ergebnisse der Exakten Natur-wissenschaft 20, p. 303 (1942) Goulding, J.S., [A Study of Large-Scale Focusing Schlieren Systems], Masters Thesis, University of Witwatersrand (2006) Weinstein, L.M., "Review and update of lens and grid schlieren and motion camera schlieren." Eur. Phys. J. Special Topics 182, 65-95 (2010). Settles, G. S., Schlieren and shadowgraph techniques: Visualizing phenomena in transparent media, Berlin:Springer-Verlag, 2001. A. Okhotsimskii, M. Hozawa. Schlieren visualization of natural convection in binary gas-liquid systems. Chemical Engineering Science, Volume 53, Number 14, 15 July 1998, pp. 2547-2573 A. Korpel, D. Mehrl and H.H. Lin, Schlieren Imaging of Sound Fields, IEEE 1987 Ultrasonics Symposium, pages: 515-518, (1987). Schlieren Photography - How Does It Work? http://www.ian.org/Schlieren/HowTo.html -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 21:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <4bcspc-9c4.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #555614 |
James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday, February 22, 2016 at 11:46:06 AM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Water vapour (gas state of H2O) is invisible. >> >> Well that is true, > > To be clear, this is Sam you are quoting, not me. > >> but what is also true is that it has a different >> density than air and a different refractive index than air. > > Obviously you are intellectually incapable of recognizing the distinction > between evaporate (liquid H2O) and gaseous H2O. Your delusion runs so > deep that multiple times you have claimed that Schlieren imaging proves > that moist air contains gaseous H2O. Strangely you seem to recognize > that Schlieren imaging involves refraction. Strangely you seem to be > emotionally incapable of grasping the fact that refraction must involve > microdroplets, not gaseous H2O. Possibly you are emotionally incapable > of distinguishing between evaporate and gaseous H2O. I don't know. And > I don't care. Why don't you see if you can find a professional that can > help you with that distinction. All totally incorrect. Schlieren imaging shows, among other things, the difference in density of air at different temperatures. Are you saying you are seeing microdroplets of air? -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web